🚀 go-pugleaf

On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 20:42:41 -0700, LarryG@Yahuu.com wrote:

> On Sep 16, 9:37 am, God Bless Texas <no.one.no....@no.where.org>
> wrote:
>> On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 00:23:21 -0700, Lar...@Yahuu.com wrote:
>>
>> > Apparently you don't know the difference between opinion and facts.
>>
>> You want to compare training or profession, when it comes to discerning
>> opinion vs. fact?  I didn't think so . . .
> 
> What is this?  You issue a challenge and conclude that I will
> not respond BEFORE you even post the thing?  Not very
> honest or ethical.

Well, since I know your training and profession, I supposed I could make
that leap - not very polite, but probably accurate.  Would you like to
compare education and training in the scientific field?
 
>> You'll take absurd rumor and pseudo-scientific paranoia over
>> engineering facts?
> 
> You assume that the entire case implicating government involvement in
> 9/11 rests on the collapse of the Twin Towers.  Even without this issue,
> no realistic explaination has been given for the demomlition of WTC7,
> the confiscation of all videos of the pentagon attack, the destruction
> of crime scene evidence, and Dick Cheney's no shoot down order, to name
> just a few omissions of the official conspiracy theory.

You insist on believing rumors and speculation, then weave them together
to form a pattern.  Have you ever seen the movie "A Beautiful
Mind"? Your thought processes seem similar to those of Dr. Nash as depicted
in that movie - classic schizophrenic paranoia, IIRC.

> Come back when you actually have an informed and
substantiate response.

Response to what?  I have not the time to fill my mind with insanity - the
fundament is absurd, and thus the trappings are meaningless.